Tiny terrier saved kids from pit bulls

[mosca]

Originally Posted by Rigs11

great, here we go again. Why then is it that pits have the most reported attacks, and the most deaths?Why is it that dog fighters use pits?No one is ignoring the other dogs, as I stated in my post all dogs can bite,but the pit has both agression and brute strength.

You're right - pits have the most reported attacks. They cause the most deaths, and are the dogs most often used in dog fights. That doesn't overshadow the similar damage done by other dog breeds.

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL...llDogsBite.htm

The aggression and brute strength you mention are exhibited by many other dog breeds. Banning pit bulls will only account for somewhat over 50% of that problem. I don't see the logic behind that solution unless it is applied to the rest of the dog breeds responsible for the other 40-something % of attacks resulting in death, dismemberment, severe bite wounds, etc.

[mosca]

Originally Posted by Popps

What also helps is not owning a family pet that can tear the face off of your kid at any minute, because the kid said "no" to it or something.

Not sure why you own a boxer, then - they definitely have the capability to do that.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by mosca

Not sure why you own a boxer, then - they definitely have the capability to do that.

Capability and probability are two different things.

Great Danes have the "capability" to kill someone in minutes. Yet, they never do.

An abused Boxer might snap at you, like any other dog. But, if you understand the breed, you know they're no more of a threat than a Lab might be.

In other words, they won't sleep in your bed... then get up and kill your sister or tear the face off of your 9 year old girl.

There's a reason you don't hear about other dog breeds doing this stuff... and YOU DO hear about PBs doing it.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by mosca

I don't see the logic behind that solution unless it is applied to the rest of the dog breeds responsible for the other 40-something % of attacks resulting in death, dismemberment, severe bite wounds, etc.

First off, solving 50% of any problem is a good place to start.

Secondly, if the slippery slope argument is coming, please save it. I've already dealt with that.

As far as I'm concerned, any breed that shows itself to be a regular nuisance should be under the microscope... and I absolutely love dogs. But, if society can't ****ing handle the responsibility, we can all just own hamsters or something. I don't have the time or patience to play games with kids being attacked and women being killed.

[orange 4 life]

Originally Posted by Rigs11

great, here we go again. Why then is it that pits have the most reported attacks, and the most deaths?Why is it that dog fighters use pits?No one is ignoring the other dogs, as I stated in my post all dogs can bite,but the pit has both agression and brute strength.

great, here we go again.

1) because the MAJORITY of stories you hear about arent APBT's at all, and a large percentage arent even mixes, but it makes a better story. the last reported attack here in colorado was an amstaff/mastiff mix, yet the paper said "pitbull".

2) they use APBT's for fighting because they are strong, quick, and theyre NOT unpredictable. theyre NOT a danger to the humans (if you wanna call those fvggers "human") that are fighting them.

3) they do NOT have "aggression" as most APBT's (regardless of what theyve been bred for) are naturally EXTREMELY docile towards humans. aggression is extremely uncommon in the breed, and "brute strength" could be used to describe many large and midsized breeds. the "lock jaw" rumor has no basis in reality, and with that in mind staffy's, shepherds, mastiffs, dobermans, and many other breeds have just as much (or more) "brute strength".

[mosca]

Originally Posted by Popps

Capability and probability are two different things.

Great Danes have the "capability" to kill someone in minutes. Yet, they never do.

Yes they do. Between 1979 - 1998 Great Danes were responsible for 7 deaths, according to Beerslug's earlier posted data.

A more recent attack:
Great Dane attacks girl, 14

Fri May 18, 2007, 12:27 PM EDT

A three-legged Great Dane weighing about 200 pounds attacked a 14-year-old girl who was visiting her mother’s home, leaving what Fire Lt. Jim O’Brien described as “a gaping hole” in her scalp.

The mother had to pry the dog’s mouth open to release her daughter’s head.
(continued at link)

Originally Posted by Popps

An abused Boxer might snap at you, like any other dog. But, if you understand the breed, you know they're no more of a threat than a Lab might be.

In other words, they won't sleep in your bed... then get up and kill your sister or tear the face off of your 9 year old girl.

Boxers have been responsible for 3 deaths between 1979-1998, according to the same data. Labradors, 5.

One particularly vicious recent boxer attack:

Dogs Viciously Attack Veterinarian

POSTED: 4:36 pm PST December 12, 2006
UPDATED: 5:07 pm PST December 12, 2006

(excerpt)
The attack left Nancy Matthews with more than 100 bite wounds over most of her body. According to Matthews, the attack took place while she was on a walk in Valley Center with her two young sons. She said the two boxers suddenly attacker her and mauled her for nearly 15 minutes.

"It went on for so long, I started losing blood and losing consciousness," Matthews told NBC 7/39. "At one point, I knew they were killing me."

Matthews said she was terrified the dogs would turn on her sons -- ages 9 and 11 -- and that she kept screaming for them to run away. During the attack, Matthews curled up into a ball. She said the dogs were literally tearing her flesh apart.

Photos taken about a week after the attack still show the severity of Matthew's wounds. She said she had hundreds of bites and still has 90 scars.
(continued at link)

Originally Posted by Popps

There's a reason you don't hear about other dog breeds doing this stuff... and YOU DO hear about PBs doing it.

You only "hear" about PBs doing it because they're what the major media focuses on in this hysteria. Other dog breeds are doing it as well, they just don't get as much attention. It takes a little more digging to find out about these cases.

[Popps]

Jake, for the record... I haven't seen a single story that mis-reported the dog, and most include pics, including the little girl attack above. I'm not saying it can't happen, but I'd suspect that it's nowhere near a "majority."

[orange 4 life]

Originally Posted by Rigs11

The statement you are making is asnine. No one can say that their dog won't ever bite. It's ludicrous. hell i can't say that about my Lab.Go tell the mother of the many toddlers and kids that have been attacked by the family pit that they make great family pets.Again, your pits might be friendly but the issue is are pits dangerous? And the answer is yes.You're trying to argue with us by offering your experience with your dogs and we are giving you actual evidence of horrific attacks. It's ridicoulous.

notice i didnt say they COULDNT ever BITE.
i said there isnt any "switch" that magically goes off and turns my little babies into vicious killers.
my elder pitbull had a group of kids throwing rocks at him, and instead of barking and/or trying to attack, he whined until i came outside to see what happened. when i came out, he jumped in my lap and pee'd himself. he was a puppy then, but i found out within weeks that he couldve jumped over the fence if he had wanted to.
my younger pit is afraid of his own shadow.
they BOTH exibited some agrression towards other animals as puppies (especially with regards to food), but i made them eat out of the same bowl and every time i heard a growl i put my face in between them. growling immediately stopped, and not for a second did i fear for myself.
neither has ever even snapped at a human, yet theyve both had instances where many/most dogs wouldve.

my lab on the other hand snapped at my son, my father, and most recently got kicked out of the vets office for being aggressive. he's a good boy too, but not nearly as reliable around strangers and kids.

sure, its within the realm of possibility that one of my APBT's could bite, but its EXTREMELY unlikely, and the "switch" just isnt there.
as for other peoples dogs in these stories, i just cant say because i wasnt there.
what i can say is that in all my work with animals (which is extensive) ive NEVER seen a well loved/trained APBT bite anyone....ever.
further, no one i know that works with the breed ever has either.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by mosca

Yes they do. Between 1979 - 1998 Great Danes were responsible for 7 deaths, according to Beerslug's earlier posted .

Fair enough. 7 in 20 years. I'd guess we could find that many pit bull killings in the last couple of weeks.

But, I stand corrected. I should have been more clear that Great Danes ALMOST NEVER kill, whereas pit bulls do it with regularity.

The other likelihood here is that the Great Dane related deaths likely had more to do with sheer size than temperament.

Originally Posted by mosca

You only "hear" about PBs doing it .

Wait, so you just posted two news stories about other dog attacks.... then you turn around and say "they only report PB attacks?!?"

Which is it?

I have a suggestion... maybe they report PB attacks because they're the most common and the most brutal.

[orange 4 life]

Originally Posted by Popps

What also helps is not owning a family pet that can tear the face off of your kid at any minute, because the kid said "no" to it or something.

come on my friend. if you really believed that happens with any degree of frequency there's no way you'd let your dog play with pits.
you know as well as i do that something sounds fishy with that story. a well loved well trained dog of ANY breed isnt likely to attack over being told "no", and in my extensive experience its bordering on the impossible for a pitbull to do so.
you'd have a better chance of being struck by lightning.....inside.

[Popps]

According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA.

Over 2/3rd of the kills from a breed that can't possibly even make up 10% of the dog population.

Yea... nothing to see there.

[mosca]

Originally Posted by Popps

First off, solving 50% of any problem is a good place to start.

I don't see the logic in only addressing half of the problem, when the proposed solution of banning certain breeds can certainly be applied to many other attack-prone dog breeds.

Originally Posted by Popps

As far as I'm concerned, any breed that shows itself to be a regular nuisance should be under the microscope... and I absolutely love dogs. But, if society can't ****ing handle the responsibility, we can all just own hamsters or something. I don't have the time or patience to play games with kids being attacked and women being killed.

Pit bulls are hardly at the top of the list of things that some members of society "can't handle the responsibility" to have. May as well ban automobiles and force everyone to ride bikes or trains, due to the huge amount of auto fatalities.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by orange 4 life

come on my friend. if you really believed that happens with any degree of frequency there's no way you'd let your dog play with pits.

Again, I don't think this issue/debate should be hinged on what you or I "feel" or even necessarily our own experiences. It's got to be judged on a broader pool of evidence.

I've had great experiences with them. That doesn't really mean anything in a broader sense.

[orange 4 life]

Originally Posted by Popps

Jake, for the record... I haven't seen a single story that mis-reported the dog, and most include pics, including the little girl attack above. I'm not saying it can't happen, but I'd suspect that it's nowhere near a "majority."

earlier in the thread i listed a number of misreports (one which was actually a boxer mix), and here in colorado we've had two that i know of.
further, when i contacted 9news and asked if they would correct their mistake, they led me through a bunch of red tape before basically just saying "no".

the one attack was the amstaff/mastiff mix and the other (many years ago) was a shepherd mix.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by orange 4 life

earlier in the thread i listed a number of misreports (one which was actually a boxer mix), and here in colorado we've had two that i know of.
further, when i contacted 9news and asked if they would correct their mistake, they led me through a bunch of red tape before basically just saying "no".

the one attack was the amstaff/mastiff mix and the other (many years ago) was a shepherd mix.

What would you say this is...

[mosca]

Originally Posted by Popps

Wait, so you just posted two news stories about other dog attacks.... then you turn around and say "they only report PB attacks?!?"

Which is it?

I have a suggestion... maybe they report PB attacks because they're the most common and the most brutal.

I had to search the web to find the stories on the other dog attacks. I found a compilation of them only when I stumbled onto a pit bull advocacy site. Most had been reported in local news outlets, and then seemingly swept under the rug. Pit bull stories, on the other hand, seem to be more widely reported by larger media outlets, often with a nationwide audience. Maybe it's because they're more common and brutal. I also think that it's part of a larger hype and hysteria centered selectively on that one breed.

[orange 4 life]

Originally Posted by Popps

According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA.

Over 2/3rd of the kills from a breed that can't possibly even make up 10% of the dog population.

Yea... nothing to see there.

damnit man.
come on now. thats the ONLY info that keeps being trotted out, and its been torn apart pages ago.
the damn thing is ADMITTEDLY biased as it takes ALL pitbull TYPE breeds and lumps them into one.
further, if you look at the kills from specific times ('79-'85 for example) pitbulls (THEIR definition which includes about 10 different breeds) arent even tops on the list.

beyond that, read the book that analyzes the individual cases that resulted in death. not ONE found a well trained dog in a loving home.

there ISNT much to see there, other than the fact that any large dog does have the ability to kill, and should therefore be handled with caution (like we didnt already know that).

[orange 4 life]

Originally Posted by Popps

What would you say this is...

i meant to comment on that already.
i think that looks like an APBT. possibly a purebred.

all i can say is that something seems strange here.
can you imagine your dog doing that?

can you imagine MY dogs doing that based on what you know of them and me?

buddy, ive never heard of that happening.
also, you must admit that many/most of the pics on the net and/or television do NOT look like that dog or my dogs. they look like amstaff/mastiffs, canario/mastiffs, bull terrier/shepherd, etc.
lots of big bodies and ENORMOUS heads, which of course are NOT traits of APBT's
these stories are sentationalized all the time. sometimes its using "pitbull" when the attack was by another breed, and other times its just misleading the public (as was done here on the 1st post of the thread) as to how and why the attack happened.

"tiny terrier saves kids from...pitbull"
or perhaps the pits didnt want the kids in the 1st place? gimme a break

"family pet goes on the rampage"
or perhaps it was tied to a post in the backyard and starved and ignored for years. not really a family pet.

bottom line is that we in this country have a pitbull hysteria going on, and our news media will capitalize on that whenever possible. you cant actually doubt that can you?

[Popps]

Originally Posted by mosca

I don't see the logic in only addressing half of the problem.

Would you rather I handed you $100 or $50.

What do you mean you don't see the logic? Improving anything by 50% or higher is a drastic amount.

Originally Posted by mosca

Pit bulls are hardly at the top of the list of things that some members of society "can't handle the responsibility" to have. May as well ban automobiles and force everyone to ride bikes or trains, due to the huge amount of auto fatalities.

Slippery slope nonsense... always where people run to hide when they can't directly engage a debate.

"Well... you can hurt yourself with a kitchen fork, too... should we ban those... HUH!??!??"

Great. Fantastic argument. You win.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by orange 4 life

bottom line is that we in this country have a pitbull hysteria going on, and our news media will capitalize on that whenever possible. you cant actually doubt that can you?

Jake, the easiest analogy I can think of is the behavior of NFL players. I used to get a ton of **** for suggesting that they needed to clean up their act.
Now days, it's almost unanimous around here that they do.

In other words, yes... media can run with stories at times, but at a certain point... those stories can actually take on validity. I don't think it's the breed's fault, but I think there's something to the idea that the breed (and potentially mixes of the breed) have become problematic.

[Popps]

I will concede this to you guys... other breeds might be getting a bit of a free ride due to the PBs being in the spotlight. I don't think people being killed by a dog is ever "swept under the rug," but maybe a simple dog-bite from a Collie won't get the same media play as one by a PB.

That STILL doesn't mean that the breed isn't a prime offender.

[mosca]

Originally Posted by Popps

Would you rather I handed you $100 or $50.

What do you mean you don't see the logic? Improving anything by 50% or higher is a drastic amount.

Don't see the logic in banning only pit bulls as opposed to all large dog breeds who share the same attack histories.

Originally Posted by Popps

Slippery slope nonsense... always where people run to hide when they can't directly engage a debate.

"Well... you can hurt yourself with a kitchen fork, too... should we ban those... HUH!??!??"

My point is that there are numerous things (many that inflict exponentially higher amounts of damage to society than pit bulls) that a select portion of society has proven not to be responsible enough to handle. That doesn't necessarily translate into prohibiting it altogether from the rest of society.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by mosca

Don't see the logic in banning only pit bulls as opposed to all large dog breeds who share the same attack histories.

Well, there seems to be a problem with statistics, but most of what I've read/seen seems to put PBs (and similar terriers) near the top of the attack/kill list.

But, to answer your question... if any breed shows destructive aggression with regularity, then yes... I think they should be dealt with.

Originally Posted by mosca

My point is that there are numerous things (many that inflict exponentially higher amounts of damage to society

Well, for the most part... if you're talking about drugs, etc. There's already efforts in place to deal with most of it.

[Rigs11]

Originally Posted by mosca

You're right - pits have the most reported attacks. They cause the most deaths, and are the dogs most often used in dog fights. That doesn't overshadow the similar damage done by other dog breeds.

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL...llDogsBite.htm

The aggression and brute strength you mention are exhibited by many other dog breeds. Banning pit bulls will only account for somewhat over 50% of that problem. I don't see the logic behind that solution unless it is applied to the rest of the dog breeds responsible for the other 40-something % of attacks resulting in death, dismemberment, severe bite wounds, etc.

And if you had been paying attention I never stated that banning the breed was the answer.

[Rigs11]

Originally Posted by orange 4 life

notice i didnt say they COULDNT ever BITE.
i said there isnt any "switch" that magically goes off and turns my little babies into vicious killers.
my elder pitbull had a group of kids throwing rocks at him, and instead of barking and/or trying to attack, he whined until i came outside to see what happened. when i came out, he jumped in my lap and pee'd himself. he was a puppy then, but i found out within weeks that he couldve jumped over the fence if he had wanted to.
my younger pit is afraid of his own shadow.
they BOTH exibited some agrression towards other animals as puppies (especially with regards to food), but i made them eat out of the same bowl and every time i heard a growl i put my face in between them. growling immediately stopped, and not for a second did i fear for myself.
neither has ever even snapped at a human, yet theyve both had instances where many/most dogs wouldve.

my lab on the other hand snapped at my son, my father, and most recently got kicked out of the vets office for being aggressive. he's a good boy too, but not nearly as reliable around strangers and kids.

sure, its within the realm of possibility that one of my APBT's could bite, but its EXTREMELY unlikely, and the "switch" just isnt there.
as for other peoples dogs in these stories, i just cant say because i wasnt there.
what i can say is that in all my work with animals (which is extensive) ive NEVER seen a well loved/trained APBT bite anyone....ever.
further, no one i know that works with the breed ever has either.

So let me get this straight. All the news reports are biased against pits. All the records on pit bull attacks are wrong.And pits are less aggressive than labs.All this based on your dogs? Again, do a google for pit bull attacks and read about the switch that you say doesn't exist.